Replies

1. 
   fourquarter | Jul 22, 2002 06:44pm | #1

   I have recently traded my cameras in for tablesaws etc, I was a commercial product photographer for about ten years and here's my advice to everyone regarding photographing your work on a budget and still producing good results:

   Your camera is the least important of all. Any 35mm camera will do, spend your money on a good zoom lens. Here,as in the rest of life, you get what you pay for.

   Get a tripod, and a cable release. These will help to steady your camera and assist you in framing your shot. Much better than hand-holding, as you can really study your shot and make minute adjustments to camera angle, and the release will eliminate vibration should you need a long exposure.

   Lastly , in terms of quality, is film. The slower the speed (ISO 200, 400, etc) the sharper the grain. Go as slow as you can find, and then set your camera even slower. For example, use ISO 100, then set your camera's ISO dial to 80 (this will give color print film an extra bit of saturation in color). You needn't alert your lab of this, just have it processed as normal.

   As far as lighting goes, there are no real cheap ways to go. SO I will make a couple of suggestions. If you have good window lighting or even an open shop door, you can make a version of a "soft-box" that professional photographers use by covering a window with a roll of drafting vellum, or similar material. If you are shooting large pieces, you can make a frame and attach the vellum to it and put the frame between the sun and your piece. This will even out the light and give it those soft highlights that are usually seen in comercial photography.

   Barring this technique, you can use Foam-core( a white faced foam board about 1/4" thick), available at art supply houses to bounce light onto your project. (this can be used to supplement the window light as well.)

   If you choose, you can use cheap shop lights ( the type with a silver reflector and squeeze clamps) to light a project but with one important caveat. This light will appear as a heavy amber cast unless you use a FULL SPECTRUM BULB. Available at a lighting shop or green house supply. You can filter out this light at the lens, or use a tungsten balanced film, but in this case all your light must come from tungsten ( household) bulbs. Any daylight that strikes your subject will render very blue on tungsten film, or filtered daylight film.

   Finally , when you shoot, bracket your exposure by a half stop either side of what you believe your optimum exposure is. If you think your exposure is f/8 at 1/60 sec., shoot one frame there, 1 frame at f8.5@1/60 and 1 frame at f/5.6 1/2 @ 1/60. that way you are covered, and the lab should send you three pictures each with varying degrees of density. one a bit too dark, one a bit too light, and one dead on. But sometimes it's the one that should be too light or too dark that comes out just right.

   If you have any other questions, please fell free to ask.

   [email protected]

   Hope this helps,

   Kelley Hamby

1. 
   jimblodgett | Jul 22, 2002 10:32pm | #2

   I agree with what Kelly said except I like to bracket with shutter speed instead of with aperture size.  You get a consistant depth of field that way.

   Also keep in mind, if you're using film, instead of digital, the larger the format (negative size) the less it has to be enlarged, thereby giving better saturation.  If you're going to learn, you can just as easilly learn with a medium format (120 film) as you can with 35mm, which is marginal, at best. 4x5 film would be better yet, but the film's expensive and so is the processing.  Medium format is a real good compromise, but you might have to poke around to find someone to process it for you.

   Lighting is a whole profession in itself.  You might try looking into taking a studio lighting class at a local college.  It's amazing how complex a subject lighting is.

   "Photography" by Barbara London and John Upton would be a good book to start with.  It gives a nice overview of basic techniques and lighting.  I think it's pretty much aknowlwdged as a good text for entry level photography. 

   The good news is that with so many people embracing digital photography, there's a ton of used lighting and film photography equipment around these days.  The bad news is, ebay has driven the price of it up to where it's tough to find great deals.  Brinkmann for president in '04

1. 
   fourquarter | Jul 22, 2002 11:11pm | #3

   jim's correct in terms of format, however medium format is a departure for most folks, and the complexity of 4x5 is a whole other step away from point and shoot.

   Also, the bracketing with shutter speed is a good idea except that unless you have a killer new style camera with additional variable steps between the major shutter speeds, you are stuck to bracketing by whole stops which is usually too great of a change.

   Another idea for those of you interested in having your work shot in a professional manner. If you can find a local school that teaches photography you may well be able to get a screaming deal on student work. Just ask the director of that dept. to reccomend a student or two. They are excitied at the prospect of plying their trade, they have access to school facilities, and their prices should be reasonable. Expect to pay for all materials as well as time. ( in thios case they would be polaroid, film, processing, and prints) But you could get the larger formats as previously mentioned, which will usually result in a better overall image quality.

   Gotta get back to it.

   Good luck to all

2. 
   Lilshaver | Jul 23, 2002 12:47am | #4

   I wonder if you can help me (and hopefully others) with a nagging question I have. I have invested in studio lights, first using photolamps in metal hoods and then getting a three fixture quartz kit with stands and umbrellas. This works great in my studio when I can shoot at night (no daylight). But, any other time the quartz lights are difficult. So, I'd like to invest in electronic flash units. My problem is finding some straightforward advice on which lights I should get. I know that the large professional units that cost $$$$$$ would be great, but I want to keep costs down. For that I'm willing to sacrifice recycle time and other conveniences. Can you suggest a source of information? I've checked out many books from the library but none cover what I need to know.

   Thanks for any help.

   J. Patrick

1. 
   fourquarter | Jul 23, 2002 04:45pm | #5

   about the only source for strobe light info is catalogs. There is a company called Calumet Photographic

   ( http://www.calumetphoto.com) that has a good catalog and I'm sure their web page is also swell. One thing you could consider is blackout curtains for your studio, or a large roll of gelatin filtration that goes over your windows to filter the daylight to a tungsten balance. Otherwise, you could consider the purchase of a couple of Norman portable units, they have a very small head, battery pack and charging unit for the batteries. However, each unit will probably run somewhere in the $500 to $700 range. FOr economy I'd stick to Tunsten, or "hot lights", and just supplement them with small flashes filtered to match, or gel the windows as described earlier.

   To more precisely answer your question, there's not a good resource that I'm aware of that rates and compares flash and strobe units. Sorry .

   KH

3. 
   PineIslander | Jul 23, 2002 10:40pm | #7

   Yikes! this is all pretty intimidating... thank you all for your input.

   While I've got all this wonderful expertise at my disposal, let''s go back to square one and address a fundamental concept:

   If you were in my shoes (a photographic neophyte with $0.00 invested to date) would you go digital or 35mm?

   My thought is that digital may promote the creative process a little more, since you can feel free to experiment at will without the looming expense of film and development. Also, I forsee most of my future advertising/promotion being web-based.

   Is there any advantage to taking 35mm originals and scanning them or having them developed professionally and distributed on CD, as opposed to shooting on digital?

   What would you recommend?

1. 
   fourquarter | Jul 24, 2002 12:28am | #8

   Well Piney,

   If I were in your shoes and planning on doing mostly web based promotions then I would indeed go digital. Your reasons are well founded. No cost for film or processing and you can see immediately what you've got and if you need to keep shooting.

   The only advantage to shooting traditional film and scanning is that you can get a larger scan ( easily over a meg ) from a good scan, but a scan can cost upwards of $100 and I don't see a web based use for such high resolution.

   By all means go digital, and if you buy a digital camera that has a white balance feature, you can mix your light sources with very little problem (e.g. daylight and tungsten can be used in the same shot without any filtration).

   Adding the scans and processing is probably just going to restrict how much you shoot and what seems worthy of the cash outlay. With digital you can shoot every piece you make with very little additional cost.

   You can even shoot your projects as they progress and give your clients email updates if that's something that would interest you.

1. 
   PineIslander | Jul 24, 2002 02:24pm | #9

   Thanks 4Q, for the great advice and information. I truly appreciate it.

   My philosophy about electronic stuff is that if at all possible, buy SONY... it tends to be a bit pricey, but (just like tools) there is no substitute for quality. I was just popping around some camera sites, and they get great reviews.

   Anyone have a digital camera that they would recommend?

1. 
   RockyRothrock | Jul 24, 2002 03:56pm | #10

   If you want to go digital, go to the http://www.dpreview.com. Everything about anything digital is on that website. I would also suggest that if you go this route, go as big as you can. I have found the sonys to be just ok-you would be better off keeping with a brand that hasa longer track record making cameras ie canon, nikon. Shooting film and scanning isn't a bad idea, but if you don't really need the quality that film will give, then cut to the chase and go digital.

   Have fun

   Rocky

2. 
   RockyRothrock | Jul 23, 2002 05:38pm | #6

   You have received some pretty good advice so far, but the issue can be a bit complicated, as you have found out. I shoot professionaly and have for 15 years. As said above, any good basic 35mm camera/lens combination with 100 speed film will work fine, but it is always the lighting the seperates the men from the boys. Its very hard to do good work without good, controllable lights-but not impossible. Unless you really want to dive in deep,

   you might try working with someone at a local school-sometimes trade schools have all the stuff and eager students, but no subjects. contact the local paper and talk to their photographers. They are usually loking for a little freelance work. What is most important here is that this approach gives you some insight and advice into what you might need if you want to do this all on your own, without buying alot of stuff and trial and error. Email me and we can talk specifics about lights, meters, exposures and so on. I would love to help out. I also posted a "mission bedside table" in the gallery. That lighting setup is pretty typical for this sort of thing and not hard to do.

   Have fun-Rocky